Why can't WWE commit to Daniel Bryan?

[tekkenguy]

Daniel Bryan is without a doubt the most over guy on the entire roster, and he was set for a big push for SummerSlam. However, that push quickly got derailed by the formation of the Authority. Why is it that WWE isn't willing to pull the trigger on Daniel Bryan?

[angryfan]

Simple answer is because the don't want to. They don't see him as being the kind of star they want to promote. Essentially, they (meaning Vince) see him as another flash in the pan that won't last. So they book him as Gilligan and if he still draws, great, but if not then they've proved their theory.

[rnrk supports BLM]

Why can't WWE commit to Steve Austin?

Steve Austin is without a doubt the most over guy on the entire roster, and he was set for a big push for Wrestlemania by winning the Royal Rumble. However, that push quickly got derailed by taking away his title shot and having him lose to Bret Hart AGAIN. Why is it that WWF isn't willing to pull the trigger on Steve Austin?

[Boo!]

Maybe he isn't that over?

I've raised the point before and got largely ridiculed but maybe research, ratings breakdowns etc, aren't marrying up to the in-arena reaction. This week we've had the biggest fall in the third hour ratings for Raw in memory (according to Meltzer) and while that isn't all Bryan's fault, of course, he isn't completely absolved of responsibility either.

A cynic might say all we have to go on his popularity is pseudo 'sing-a-long' crowd reactions and internet fans, for whom a 'darling' are a dime a dozen.

Maybe there's more to it than this big evil company refusing to push this obviously massively over star.

[Allie Kitsune]

Bryan-haters like to criticize him for having a sing-song catchphrase, but pretty much every top guy since and including Austin has had one.

[thelonewolf527]

Dec 17, 2013 19:46:44 GMT -5 Boo! said:

Maybe he isn't that over?

I've raised the point before and got largely ridiculed but maybe research, ratings breakdowns etc, aren't marrying up to the in-arena reaction. This week we've had the biggest fall in the third hour ratings for Raw in memory (according to Meltzer) and while that isn't all Bryan's fault, of course, he isn't completely absolved of responsibility either.

A cynic might say all we have to go on his popularity is pseudo 'sing-a-long' crowd reactions and internet fans, for whom a 'darling' are a dime a dozen.

Maybe there's more to it than this big evil company refusing to push this obviously massively over star.

One thing I noticed on Raw (and maybe the PPV I don't remember) was that the live crowd didn't really react too heavily to the intro of Bryan's theme but then they started chanting "Yes" when he walked through the curtain.

I think part of it is the chant, sort of like Angle's "You suck" and the "Let's go Cena, Cena sucks" chants. Or a better example would be how the crowd chants "We the people" despite the fact that no one gives two shits about Jack Swagger. It's not entirely chants, but it's definitely a part of his overness with the live audience.

[metylerca]

Dec 17, 2013 19:49:25 GMT -5 Allie Kitsune said:

Bryan-haters like to criticize him for having a sing-song catchphrase, but pretty much every top guy since and including Austin has had one.

"Haters"

In 2013?

[angryfan]

Dec 17, 2013 19:46:44 GMT -5 Boo! said:

Maybe he isn't that over?

I've raised the point before and got largely ridiculed but maybe research, ratings breakdowns etc, aren't marrying up to the in-arena reaction. This week we've had the biggest fall in the third hour ratings for Raw in memory (according to Meltzer) and while that isn't all Bryan's fault, of course, he isn't completely absolved of responsibility either.

A cynic might say all we have to go on his popularity is pseudo 'sing-a-long' crowd reactions and internet fans, for whom a 'darling' are a dime a dozen.

Maybe there's more to it than this big evil company refusing to push this obviously massively over star.

Fair point, if viewers tune out consistently from open to close while you're on top, then it should mean something. However, Orton is in the middle of title push number 12, has been cemented as main eventer for almost a decade, and has proven to drive viewers away every time they focus on him.

Heel or face, it's true. He's not an "internet darling" he's a "home grown, third generation" guy who has been a bust as a top guy since his first shot in 2004.

I'm not going to say that any rating like that is all the performer or all creative, however if two guys have the same trend (viewers tuning out on the show as it goes on while they're on top), then we would have to say both are failures. Its' not an either or situation, if X is true, and X=Y in terms of a statistical pattern, then Y is also true.

Orton's "coronation" for his 12th WWE title run saw the show lose 1/2 a million viewers from open to close. A 20 percent drop is sginficiant, and since the only two constant focuses since Bryan beat Cena are Orton and Trips, one of them has, at the very least, equal responsibility in terms of driving viewers away.

[Boo!]

Dec 17, 2013 19:50:10 GMT -5 thelonewolf527 said:

Dec 17, 2013 19:46:44 GMT -5 Boo! said:

Maybe he isn't that over?

I've raised the point before and got largely ridiculed but maybe research, ratings breakdowns etc, aren't marrying up to the in-arena reaction. This week we've had the biggest fall in the third hour ratings for Raw in memory (according to Meltzer) and while that isn't all Bryan's fault, of course, he isn't completely absolved of responsibility either.

A cynic might say all we have to go on his popularity is pseudo 'sing-a-long' crowd reactions and internet fans, for whom a 'darling' are a dime a dozen.

Maybe there's more to it than this big evil company refusing to push this obviously massively over star.

One thing I noticed on Raw (and maybe the PPV I don't remember) was that the live crowd didn't really react too heavily to the intro of Bryan's theme but then they started chanting "Yes" when he walked through the curtain.

I think part of it is the chant, sort of like Angle's "You suck" and the "Let's go Cena, Cena sucks" chants. Or a better example would be how the crowd chants "We the people" despite the fact that no one gives two shits about Jack Swagger. It's not entirely chants, but it's definitely a part of his overness with the live audience.

I think that's perhaps the crux of the matter and what people have struggled to distinguish. Maybe he isn't "I'll pay to see that dude in the main event" over. Maybe he's "Hey, this chant is fun" over. It's been said before and dismissed but I think there's definitely something in it.

Don't get me wrong I think he's over but I don't think he's "This company are mental for not making him the star" over. I think that comes from the joining in crowd bit and the whole "Christian could be the new Hogan if they gave him time *shakes fist* damn WWE" nonsense we get every so often with a different guy.

He's certainly still over enough to enjoy a world title run, however.

[MrBRulzOK]

It's not just Daniel Bryan: the WWE can't commit to anyone or anything. They can't even commit to their own storylines for the most part.

That's the problem when you have a guy like Vince still in charge of creative who is notorious for constantly changing his mind: the problem is when you constantly fluctuate on things like who to push or where a storyline should go without a clear plan in mind, you more often than not end up with a muddled mess on your hands. And good luck getting anybody to get behind something where not even you have a clear idea of where you want it to go.

[Rican]

Even if Bryan isn't setting ratings and butyrate records, it's not like anyone else in the company is either. Hell, even though he's the face of the company it's not like the WWE has reached record highs during Cena's era. I get that WWE has their pet projects of Roman Reigns and Big E waiting in the wings and that's great, I hope it works out since I like those dudes and want the WWE to be successful. But in the meantime, I don't get why they don't just run with Bryan. I don't think Bryan is ever going to be THE guy and I don't know if he should be, but I also think they should just strike while the iron is hot and see how long it lasts.

[Magic knows Black Lives Matter]

No joke on nothing, I seriously can't believe people are still using ratings as justification that Bryan isn't over. It is 2013. NOBODY ON THE ACTIVE ROSTER, WITH THE POSSIBLE EXCEPTION OF JOHN CENA , IS A CONSISTENT RATINGS OR BUYRATE DRAW. THE BRAND NAME OF WWE IS WHAT DRAWS. Like, holy shit. How many times does that have to be said? But hey, whatever pushes your agenda, right?

[SeVeN: #TheBadGuy.]

Its not like he's main eventing Superstars or something. He's on t.v every week, has match of the night every week. Takes everyone of his opponents to their limit. Hes beaten jobbers mid carders and champions. Would people prefer it if RAW was 3 hours of D-Bry YES'ing and kicking people in the chest? People complain about Cena being rammed down our throat. It seems everyone wants D-bry to be the dessert that gets crammed in there too.

As a D-bry fan I like him exactly where he's at. RISING to the top rather than be placed there.

Reading through my post it sounds like fight material but that's not what's intended. It just seems every day there is a D-bry conspiracy thread and this is the first one I replied to. Apologies if my opinion upsets anyone.

[angryfan]

Dec 17, 2013 20:03:32 GMT -5 Magic knows Black Lives Matter said:

No joke on nothing, I seriously can't believe people are still using ratings as justification that Bryan isn't over. It is 2013. NOBODY ON THE ACTIVE ROSTER, WITH THE POSSIBLE EXCEPTION OF JOHN CENA , IS A CONSISTENT RATINGS OR BUYRATE DRAW. THE BRAND NAME OF WWE IS WHAT DRAWS. Like, holy shit. How many times does that have to be said? But hey, whatever pushes your agenda, right?

Ratings numbers I agree, but if I'm looking at total viewers, that seems more statistically reliable. If I see a trend that says there is a consistent downslope whenever variable X is the focus variable, then I have to pay attention to it. This week we saw a show where Orton has just won the title outright, basically ending the summer feud. The payoff saw a half a million people tune out.

A 20% decrease is substantial, especially when we've seen a downward slope in total consumers for months where he was the only consistent variable in the main storyline.

To me, if you can't get things to hold, and keep a viewer for the course of a program, then there is a problem. Months of this trend, the second lowest purchased PPV in the 29 year history of running the programming format, this isn't a Monday Night Wars ratings thing, it's a trend.

There is an issue, that's not deniable, but if I see a trend then I look for the variable that occurs most often.

[mizerable]

Dec 17, 2013 19:46:44 GMT -5 Boo! said:

Maybe he isn't that over?

I've raised the point before and got largely ridiculed but maybe research, ratings breakdowns etc, aren't marrying up to the in-arena reaction. This week we've had the biggest fall in the third hour ratings for Raw in memory (according to Meltzer) and while that isn't all Bryan's fault, of course, he isn't completely absolved of responsibility either.

A cynic might say all we have to go on his popularity is pseudo 'sing-a-long' crowd reactions and internet fans, for whom a 'darling' are a dime a dozen.

Maybe there's more to it than this big evil company refusing to push this obviously massively over star.

Is he over? Without a doubt.

Is he a draw? That's debateable.

There is a difference.

[Magic knows Black Lives Matter]

Dec 17, 2013 20:11:55 GMT -5 angryfan said:

Dec 17, 2013 20:03:32 GMT -5 Magic knows Black Lives Matter said:

No joke on nothing, I seriously can't believe people are still using ratings as justification that Bryan isn't over. It is 2013. NOBODY ON THE ACTIVE ROSTER, WITH THE POSSIBLE EXCEPTION OF JOHN CENA , IS A CONSISTENT RATINGS OR BUYRATE DRAW. THE BRAND NAME OF WWE IS WHAT DRAWS. Like, holy shit. How many times does that have to be said? But hey, whatever pushes your agenda, right?

Ratings numbers I agree, but if I'm looking at total viewers, that seems more statistically reliable. If I see a trend that says there is a consistent downslope whenever variable X is the focus variable, then I have to pay attention to it. This week we saw a show where Orton has just won the title outright, basically ending the summer feud. The payoff saw a half a million people tune out.

A 20% decrease is substantial, especially when we've seen a downward slope in total consumers for months where he was the only consistent variable in the main storyline.

To me, if you can't get things to hold, and keep a viewer for the course of a program, then there is a problem. Months of this trend, the second lowest purchased PPV in the 29 year history of running the programming format, this isn't a Monday Night Wars ratings thing, it's a trend.

There is an issue, that's not deniable, but if I see a trend then I look for the variable that occurs most often.

Again, that's a problem with WWE's format and the diminishing drawing power of their brand. It could have been pretty much any "top star" in those positions, the results would have been the same. The point I'm making is that the days of one guy drawing in fans, at least on a major stage, is over. It's been that way for a long while now.

[Chip]

I'm just angry that he's a two time WWE Champion and the combined reigns don't even come to 24 hours.

[angryfan]

Dec 17, 2013 20:18:04 GMT -5 Magic knows Black Lives Matter said:

Dec 17, 2013 20:11:55 GMT -5 angryfan said:

Ratings numbers I agree, but if I'm looking at total viewers, that seems more statistically reliable. If I see a trend that says there is a consistent downslope whenever variable X is the focus variable, then I have to pay attention to it. This week we saw a show where Orton has just won the title outright, basically ending the summer feud. The payoff saw a half a million people tune out.

A 20% decrease is substantial, especially when we've seen a downward slope in total consumers for months where he was the only consistent variable in the main storyline.

To me, if you can't get things to hold, and keep a viewer for the course of a program, then there is a problem. Months of this trend, the second lowest purchased PPV in the 29 year history of running the programming format, this isn't a Monday Night Wars ratings thing, it's a trend.

There is an issue, that's not deniable, but if I see a trend then I look for the variable that occurs most often.

Again, that's a problem with WWE's format and the diminishing drawing power of their brand. It could have been pretty much any "top star" in those positions, the results would have been the same. The point I'm making is that the days of one guy drawing in fans, at least on a major stage, is over. It's been that way for a long while now.

I don't disagree. The days of "one guy" drawing went out in 1993 in my opinion. Viewers are turning out, there are fewer PPV purchases unless they bring back a big name star, which means that there are two issues. The current "cast" isn't as appealing to viewers as those from past periods. The "writing team" and "producer" (Vince) seem to insist that the same show format from 30 years ago should still work.

An industry that isn't "en vogue", a show that relies on 30 year old presentation formats due to an out of touch man havin the last word. Yes, there is some WCW in there, but what scares me more is there are several trends that were present in the end days of the AWA.

[carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army)]

Can't commit to him?

He gets huge amounts of TV time every week, and is always in highly publicized matches. What on earth are you talking about?

[Magic knows Black Lives Matter]

Dec 17, 2013 20:28:36 GMT -5 carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) said:

Can't commit to him?

He gets huge amounts of TV time every week, and is always in highly publicized matches. What on earth are you talking about?

I'm not seeing a ring on Bryan's finger...